Permutation solves best
Doris Johnson 13, Doris Johnson is a partner at Finnegan and has a JD from Duke University, February 2013, "The Continuing (R)evolution of Injunctive Relief in the District Courts and the International Trade Commission", Finnegan | Leading IP+ Law Firm, https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/articles/the-continuing-r-evolution-of-injunctive-relief-in-the-district.html//susu
This trend may continue for several reasons. First, the ITC offers a number of advantages to patent owner complainants, in addition to the increased availability of injunctive-type relief. Not only is broad discovery permitted in ITC investigations, where the limitations imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply, but they must be concluded “at the earliest practicable time” 28—typically within about 16–18 months after institution.29 And district courts routinely stay cases once a parallel ITC investigation has been initiated.30 Thus, when there are parallel district court and ITC proceedings, discovery from the ITC is often used at the district court. While not binding, the district court also has the benefit of the ITC’s rulings on, for example, claim construction. In addition, nothing precludes a district court from granting alternative relief to a patent owner involved in a parallel ITC investigation, regardless of the ITC’s final determination.31